Pico’quant Tales

This twerp Pico Iyer is insufferable. You have been kind to him Rehan dear.

I too happen to be an Iyer - I think this guy Pico should be nano`ised into insignificance!

Hello Rehan:

Were you funny?? Of course. Were you perceptive? Hmmm. Were you...you? God knows, who cares? But leave Pico alone. I have posted a note to your elsewhere, but realised I should be where my hear is -- at Pico`s durbar!

I think you have a problem with Pico, or he has a problem with you. Or you were worried that your ex (you sure live in the past, try the present, a present from me samajh kar)would get so besotted by Pico that you decided to do the dirty on him.

I don`t understand what is wrong about someone wanting to understand another culture. They really don`t have to scour the depths of depravity for that. Just the way people serve coffee - tea or me - should give an idea about what a culture is. Want to check me out on that? Or anything at all??

Aapki naacheez!

Hi Rehan,

I am not from Wah; I hail from that glorious city which you write so passionately about; not the city with the smart, well dressed, people queuing outside Pizza Hut, or Mcdonalds to sample their delightful cuisine, you understand.

I am interested to find what the new movie is going to be all about. Please do tell. If it is not any bother, please feel free to email me at ahayat1@hotmail.com

Sincerely,

Asim

The intertwining of religion, religious leaders, and secularim in South Asia makes interesting and somewhat confusing reading.

The Sub-Continent, or great portions or it, was ruled for close to 1000 years by Muslim kings. Yet it still remains predominately Hindu, with a Hindu culture that dominates the Islamic culture, even within Pakistan. Quite contradictory.

What would have happened had the Muslim kings forcibly converted every Hindu to Islam? Would the Sub-Continent have been one gigantic Pakistan or Bangladesh? Would the succeeding generations of the forcibly converted Hindus have cared that their forefathers were converted forcefully to Islam? I doubt it. I am quite convinced my own forefathers were converted against their will to Islam from Hinduism, but it doesn`t really bother me too much.

Pakistan was created by a man who was about as western, secular, and non-religious as any Muslim could be. Yet he created Pakistan on the basis of a separate homeland for a religious minority. But after creating the country on this basis, he then tried his best to make it a secular state. Quite contradictory.

Soon after Jinnah`s death, Pakistan ended up becoming not only a, ``safe haven`` for Indian Muslims, but also an Islamic state (Jinnah wanted the former, but not the later). So much so that Mullahs, of both the enlightened and ignorant variety, became very prominent figures. The rest of the world, including neighboring India, started viewing Pakistan as a Mullah-controlled state, where religion dominated politics. Yet the internals of Pakistan do not support this. In the last election, nearly all the Pakistani religious parties (and there are a great many of them) participated on a combined platform, supporting common candidates. Yet the religious parties won only two seats out of a possible 217+. A religious leader, historically has greater chance of getting elected to the US Congress than he does to the Pakistan National Assembly. Quite contradictory, once again.

India from the start was a secular state, with a secular constitution. It had to be secular. There was no other way for it to survive, since it had a gigantic Muslim population. Not to mention, a large Sikh and Christian population. To its credit, India was able to keep all these diverse religious groups somewhat satisfied within such a large Hindu population (I doubt such large diverse religious groups would have survived in Pakistan). However, the secular Indian govt. turned India into an economic basketcase, which watched a previously backwards Pakistan blow past it in economic and infrastructure growth. So India ended socially ahead of Pakistan and economically behind it.

Now, the situation in India has gone to the other extreme. A completely Hindu nationalist party has been voted into power by the Indians. It has won elections, again and again. If anyone doubts the religious extremism and intolerance of the BJP, they just need to go visit their official website at www.bjp.org. They are about as extremist as any political party in power anywhere. However, the BJP is currently restricted in fully implenting its Hinduvta agenda by the coalition of parties that forms the Indian govt. So now India, with the most religously diverse population in the world, and a secular constitution, is regularly electing a Hindu nationalist party into power. Another odd contradiction.

This party has however turned India`s economic fortunes around. India is now socially less stable than under the secular Congress, but economically more stable. Another contradiction, since social instability usually leads to economic instability.

Hence, it is very difficult to analyze the effects of religion on the people of the Sub-Continent, since there are so many contradictions. Pakistanis vote extremely secularly, although they vote under a completely religious constitution. Indians have started to vote on religious lines, even though they vote under a secular constitution. Another contradiction.

In the end, I think it is economics that runs the show. People vote (or accepts dictators) into power, leadership that can put the most food on their plates; be they religious or secular.

anNy #183 I see my name mentioned at the end of the post with regrets being offered for anything wrong you may have said in the post. Please feel free to write what you wish about these people: As I mentioned earlier, I am convinced there is a reason God put these hate mongerers on Chowk: this is to enable one to be mean to them without feeling guilty (and you were not being mean in your post anyway, just letting off steam). Some people are incapable of being mean to anyone, even to the most deserving cases, and I think you are one of them, and that is why you feel guilty. But anyone who has hatreds so deeply ingrained against Pakistanis or Indians or Muslims or Hindus (depending on where the idiot was born - oops, I just got mean again) as some of the folks you mention do not deserve any consideration or respect.

* * * *Aray mian, ever heard of sarcasm?

Nahin to. What the devil is that? You really have to excuse me on account of my sub par desi education :)

* * * *Okay,...but you could have used your brains for heaven`s sake!

Reckless speculation has been the demise of many an intelligent person. :)

Happy Holidays!

Asim

Asim #14:

[I fail to see how knowing the meaning of this rather insignificant, cliched, and highly abused word, could have such profound repercussions on anybody.]

--Aray mian, ever heard of sarcasm? Okay, I admit it was a poor attempt but you could have used your brains for heaven`s sake! Why would such a word make a differnce in ANYONE`S life?! Obviously I wasn`t being serious! sigh.... why does everyone always take my words at face value when it isn`t my intention to be serious? :(

Oh well... moving on... I don`t mind coming across such words in a context where there is a NEED for them - whether it`s in a literary work or in a conversation or in a movie. But when publicly thrown around in an offhand manner then yes, I do find it quite disgusting.

As you pointed out, it IS very interesting how most of the offensive words used are derogatory in nature to the female. I`m not talking about any one language - I`ve noticed this is true of all of the languages and dialects I`ve come across so far and from what I`ve learned through people I`ve met who speak different languages. Another thing I find interesting is how most people, when they come across a new language, are so interested in learning the offensive words in that language. Especially men. Countless times have I had male friends asking me for the translation of some Urdu or Punjabi swear word (the meaning of which I`m not even sure of most of the times) they`ve picked up from somewhere. Sad.

Lubna,

I fail to see how knowing the meaning of this rather insignificant, cliched, and highly abused word, could have such profound repercussions on anybody. Having said that, i am glad that at least some of the mystery is lifted from this pedestrian word, fro yourself

This word`s sole redeeming feature is that its an integral part of the rites of passage for a young pakistani male;given the fact that we tend to make such good misogynists later on in life. By repeatedly rinsing our mouths with this noun and numerous other nouns (naturally derogatory in nature to our womenfolk), we take delight in the transition from being mere boys without control our wet dreams to men who know their place in a misogynist society like ours; where women are merely second or third class citizens at best, and are simply there to cater to our puerile whims. Sad, aint it?

And i see the word chuut being used casually, (as if it is the mark of a literary giant), somehow elevated to a literary acceptance amongst the well-read, the thekedar of our culture, who define our morality. It makes me sick.

I am perhaps sticking my neck out and perhaps begging to be labelled as one;for you know, Lubna, the same word is used by some men as an insult to other men, equating them to the parting of lips. A woman! that is all she is to some men.

Sincerely,

Asim

sorry - fail to see the piquancy here!!!

Re #6:

Asim Sahib - aap ka kis mun say shukria ada karun for point #2? I shall forever be grateful to you for that morsel of knowledge you so politely threw this way - has made SUCH a profound difference in my life. sigh.. To answer your question - no, it would not - the context it`s being used in is different - in fact, the word itself is different - you wouldn`t hear a gynaecologist replacing ``vagina`` with ``c-nt`` now would you? (the latter being a word I WOULD find reprehensible) Oh well, at least you were polite about it... :)

I agree to some extent on your point #4 though.

Re: Zehra #8

I guess you are correct. It is entirely possible that Rehan Ansari is too subtle for me to understand but, being too ignorant to know that I am ignorant, I shall stand by earlier statements.

Regards.

I thought that Pico`quant was one of many kinds of chilli peppers-like Jalopenea and red hot ones.

Fuzair #7,

ouch...

rehan, what do you have to say about this?

please speak up before we`re brainwashed by fuzair`s accusations.

i was not going to get involved but good god
fuzair....talk about presumptous, ludicrous
statements...

i liked this piece..i thought it funny...but more
than funny i thought it interesting that in the
guise of humor, he has some very piercing
perceptions....of pico, of david, of the situation
and the people he was with....

heres what i found funny..kalpanas comments
about egoless girlfriends...the whole bit about
the momos...david for gods sake..he`s
hilarious...and i really like the way rehan was
able to get across davids character in the
types of questions david asks and the way he
sporadically jumps in and out.

perhaps its too subtle for some...

rehan, write on. i like this stuff.

why is everyone limiting him to pretty pictures
of lahore..this has substance to it. not that
your stuff before didnt...it was more asthetic,
this is more...this is just more.

I`m glad that I`m not the only one who has never found Rehan Ansari even remotely funny or interesting. He can write, far better than most on Chowk, but its just not interesting or worth reading.

I`ve never read anything by Pico Iyer but I`ve heard him on the radio, NPR, more than once and, unlike Rehan Ansari, Pico Iyer is screamingly funny. As far as I can tell, Kalpana took offense at Pico Iyer`s gall in writing about HER city, Toronto, without having spent half a lifetime there. This, of course, puts Iyer in the same sordid camp as the Orientalists who imagined an East and then forced us to fit their stereotypes.

Now, why Rehan Ansari can`t stand Pico Iyer, I`m not sure. Professional jealousy? Pico Iyer is famous and Rehan Ansari is not? Pico Iyer is accepted as a literary lion (of sorts, at least in the travelogue department) and Rehan Ansari is not? Because Kalpana was ecstatic at the thought of meeting Iyer? Rehan objects to being misquoted? Ok, understandable but was the misquotation material? We don`t know. Maybe Rehan Ansari just hates people of colour who do not believe that the white man is the source of all ills? Who knows? Mr. Ansari never really tells us.

Or wait, have I missed the point entirely? Pico Iyer is objectionable because Rehan Ansari says he is? Now, Iyer apparently couldn`t wait to get out of there as fast as he could. Frankly, after reading the article, I don`t blame him. As far as I can tell, Tattle was the truly objectionable person in the story but he isn`t the one being called a chuut. Rehan and friends are merely rude.

I suppose its terrible bourgeois of me but I prefer an article I read to have a point. So what is the point Mr. Ansari? Could you please enlighten us?

Re: Lubna and her queries.

#1. No Lubna you are not alone in not finding this funny and or witty.

#2.You write,..``Don`t think I want to know either. But is it supposed to be something REALLY bad?``

Would you feel the same way about the word ``Vagina`` if you were a gynaecologist? Would it still be reprehensible to you, or even as a lady.

#3 Actually i went back and reread the piece. I dont know whether to shoot Pico or Rehan.

#4 Rehan does Lahore well. This cosmopolitan stuff/pseudo-intlellectual brouhaha he is dabbling with(in this artcile as well as the pakistani intellectual one earlier), is coming across as a search for a new direction, abrwak from the old. Forgive me for being judgemental; Could not help it, being an ardent admirer of Lahore walla Rehan.

Asim